HKSAR v. HUANG Jianfeng

CACC145/2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 145 OF 2006

(ON APPEAL FROM HCCC NO. 19 OF 2006)

______________________

______________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Hon Ma CJHC (giving the judgment of the Court) :

1.  On 6 April 2006, the Applicant was convicted on his plea of two charges of robbery, both of which took place in the evening of 5 October 2005.  He was sentenced to terms of imprisonment of 5 years for each offence, both to be served consecutively.  In total, therefore, a sentence of 10 years.

2.  The facts of the 1st charge were these.  At 6:45 pm on 5 October 2005 when a woman was walking with her 2-year-old daughter and a dog along Robinson Road, the Applicant walked past her and then turned round.  He pointed a pistol like object at her chest, took away her handbag and fled.  The handbag contained the following : -

(1)   a newspaper,

(2)   a packet of tissue,

(3)   a bottle of water,

(4)   a doll,

(5)   some supermarket bags, and

(6)   a dog strap.

3.  The events of later the same evening formed the subject matter of the 2nd charge.  At about 7:50 pm when another woman was walking along Justice Drive towards Wanchai, she suddenly felt something hard pressed against her neck.  The Applicant then said “Robbery” and when she turned round, he pointed a pistol like object to the right side of her head.  He then said, “If you shout, I will shoot you to death.”  He then snatched her handbag.  The handbag contained : -

(1)   a mobile phone,

(2)   cash in the sum of $1,000,

(3)   a black wallet,

(4)   her ID card,

(5)   an Octopus card,

(6)   three keys,

(7)   some photos and papers, and

(8)   an umbrella.

4.  In sentencing the Applicant, Bokhary J adopted a starting point of 10 years for each of the robberies.  She then gave one-third discount for the guilty plea with a further reduction of 2 months on account of the Applicant’s youth (he is aged 20) and the fact that he had a clear record.  This was then further reduced to sentences of 5 years for each offence to enable a 10 year term to be imposed.

5.  Before us, the Applicant has in his written submissions said that the sentences were too severe.  He points to the fact that he comes from a poor family in Guangdong province and that his mother is sick.  The motive for the robberies was to obtain money to pay for his mother’s medical treatment.  He also points to the fact that he did not use a real gun but only a toy one.

6.  In our view, the starting points of 10 years were entirely justified.  The use of imitation firearms, made worse by the threats uttered, the fact that the victims must have been seriously scared and in the case of the Robinson Road robbery involving a 2-year-old child as well, are aggravating features.  The Judge took into account these features as well as the points that could be made in favour of the Applicant.  Her starting points cannot be faulted nor the total sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment.  The Judge arrived at this figure by reducing the two sentences to 5 years apiece and then making them consecutive.  We would have left each sentence at 6½ years each and then order 3½ years of one sentence to run consecutive to the other.  The result is the same; it is still a total of 10 years’ imprisonment.

7.  For these reasons, the application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.